linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] interconnect: Skip call into provider if initial bw is zero

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 23 Jan 2023 22:58:49 +0000
From:   Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To:     Mike Tipton <quic_mdtipton@...cinc.com>,
        Vivek Aknurwar <quic_viveka@...cinc.com>, djakov@...nel.org
Cc:     quic_okukatla@...cinc.com, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "abel >> Philipp Zabel" <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
        abelvesa@...nel.org, abel.vesa@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] interconnect: Skip call into provider if initial bw is
 zero

On 23/01/2023 20:37, Mike Tipton wrote:
> 
> This isn't actually changing it for all providers. Only for those that 
> define the get_bw() callback. Right now that's only qcom/msm8974 and 
> imx/imx. If get_bw() isn't defined, then icc_node_add() defaults to 
> INT_MAX. So, the logical behavior in that case is unchanged. Which means 
> this isn't even changing the behavior for rpmh yet, either.

Yes that adds up.

Looking at the commit for get_bw() for the 8974, I think this change 
would be OK with the intent of this commit

commit 9caf2d956cfa254c6d89c5f4d7b3f8235d75b28f
Author: Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@...aro.org>
Date:   Mon Nov 9 14:45:12 2020 +0200

@Abel what effect will skipping pre->aggregation() have on i.MX ?

---
bod